And yet it is better not to take the Mistral

The founder of the Russian Navy, Peter I standing at the end of XVII — beginning of XVIII century, has taken great strides in the merits of the independence of in the shipbuilding and ship-weapons production.

This required tremendous for long cash costs and human casualties (deaths of workmen). But brought up. Despite the general invitation to foreigners and forcing the purchase of ships for the Baltic Sea in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, made by the end of the Great Northern War (1721), shipyards and factories could give the Mariners absolutely Russian military equipment and military units of all classes.

Lessons of History

After the death of Peter Lofty Russian Empire as a result of its decisions are equally able to abandon the services of professionals from other countries who changed our master — shipbuilders and gunsmiths. Achieved independence is permitted of in the XVIII — beginning of XIX century to achieve fundamental political and military success in the struggle against their opponents.

Alarm bell sounded in the 30's and 40's of the XIX century, when Britain ended with the industrial revolution, and in almost all Western countries have begun mass production of steam engines, the construction of ships with steam engines. At that time, Emperor Nicholas I and the Head Chief of the Naval Staff, Alexander Menshikov admitted the obvious delay. The bet was made on foreign orders of steam devices, and the construction and equipment of Kronstadt and Nicholas steamship plants unnecessarily delayed.

In the end, the decision to develop Russian ships with helical propeller was made almost the other day of the Crimean War (1853-1856), and steam engines for them, and two helical corvette — "Hero" and "Warrior" ordered in the UK. In 1854, with the start of military operations against the Russian Empire, all machinery except 2-yi, who managed to deliver in Russia, the British confiscated and installed on ships of its fleet. It consists of the above and corvettes. Betrothed Cossak and Tartor («Cossack" and "Tartar"), they participated in the war under the British flag.

And it is better not to buy the "Mistral"

Critical steps taken to remedy the situation, have only led to the emergence in the Gulf of small steam gunboats, and huge helical ships and frigates, not counting the 2-began to come into operation when war has been completed. Then the Emperor Alexander II and the control of the Navy Department stately Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, despite financial difficulties, decided to expand on the Russian shipyards building helical ships and frigates. With all of this for contemporary models in the United States ordered a large spiral-shaped frigate "General Admiral", and in France — 40-gun frigate "Svetlana". The last number at that time (1858) the best achievement of naval affairs, because the system was created by a Frenchman Armand with solid steel fasteners inside a conventional wood case.

"Svetlana" proved to be a long-term vessel, but from repeating it at Russian shipyards refused because the Navy Department has taken the right course at the ready construction of steel buildings and armored fleet in enterprises of. The report on the meeting of the Municipal Council of 26 November 1860 Konstantin pointed to the need to "keep up with the other naval powers in important improvements for sea part, if we do not want to starve yourself the obvious inability to beat a strong enemy. "

Order in 1861 in the UK first steel armored batteries "Firstborn" We have started construction of armored ships in the shipyards of Saint Petersburg. In 1866, Alexander II Majesty commanded to "stop for the future government contracts abroad, just as it has already given to the implementation by the Navy Department."

In command of the royal RF was the law, which have not abolished the successors of Alexander II — Alexander III and Nicholas II. Yet the pre-revolutionary Our homeland does not have gained full independence in the development of naval weapons. It went in a spiral: right behind the apparent achievements at times appeared a need for sample orders, projects and parts of the devices abroad. The main premise of this was a relatively small number of trained engineers — ship builders and mechanics, and hence the weakness of the design bases and disadvantages of the process.

But there were other reasons connected with the desire of individual control of the Maritime Office solve the set tasks faster and cheaper and get a bribe for lucrative orders for foreigners. Namely, in the late XIX — early XX century to our fleet in France were built cruiser 1st rank "Admiral Kornilov," "Svetlana", "Bayan" Battleship "Crown Prince", the same type of "Bayan" cruiser "Admiral Makarov" and several destroyers.

While not a masterpiece of art of shipbuilding, these ships have become a good replenishment of the Russian fleet. But with all of this RF on the development of French companies have left millions of rubles in "specie" (only the "Crown Prince" cost the country 14 million).

And the other day the First World War, the Russian government and the Marine Ministry, headed by Admiral Ivan Grigorovich again "stepped on a rake", without taking into account the sad experience of 50 years of the XIX century in Germany ordered two small (light) cruisers turbine, turbine mechanisms for destroyers and diesel engines for submarines.

Obviously, the two cruisers, Launched in 1914, never made it to Russia. "Ants-Amur", renamed "Pilau", joined the German Navy in December 1914, "Admiral Nevel", named "Elbing" — September 1, 1915 (the last one died in the Battle of Jutland).

Russian agreements brought the German firms' Sheehan "," Volcano "and" Krupp "more than 10 million rubles. With these funds, except cruisers were made turbines and diesel engines for large German destroyers and submarines that participated in the war.

The impressive scale

The political and military leadership of the USSR 20-30's has taken steps to improve the training system (shipbuilding universities and faculties), made special bureaus and research institutes, has been foreign models, has invested heavily in military shipbuilding immense. But by 1941 th solve all the problems the industry has failed, and during the difficult war against Nazi Germany and its satellites initially required tanks, guns and airplanes.

And it is better not to buy the "Mistral"The situation has changed in the aftermath of the war, when attention was drawn to the modernization of the Navy. By the 60s of XX century Russian Alliance headed for full independence in military shipbuilding (including the creation of devices and weapons), it has received a strong foundation for future development. Acquired abilities managed to realize 60-80's, when the Soviet Union joined the Navy strategic nuclear submarines and multipurpose submarines, missile destroyers and cruisers (including nuclear), aircraft carriers and numerous other classes of ships.

The scale of the naval shipbuilding
has been impressive, rendered tribute to the impact on our enemies in the war, and cool completely comparable with the efforts to develop nuclear weapons and space exploration. Ships, weapons and technology from the Soviet Union supplied documentation in other countries, and what could not conceive in Russia until 1917.

However, to pay for success comes at the highest cost: the means adopted broke away from the people who worked selflessly, without receiving a decent remuneration. Economized and the personnel of the Navy, where currency allowances of officers and technical staff salary inferior officers of the U.S. Navy and Europe. About the conditions of service of the sailors and nothing to read — they are at the finals of the XX century barely meet the level middle of the last century.

The need for such a large-scale bolshennom navy and military shipbuilding, the introduction of the Navy in the cool war on the world's oceans, everyday hardships in the life of the people and sailors may be the subject of research and debate. But just to say, what a blow to Russian sea might have caused Gorbachev and Yeltsin, in particular, also the last Ukrainian colleagues. In the struggle for power, property and popularity abroad designated municipal leaders and their followers than the rest, tried to break up the Navy and naval shipbuilding, bring to the poverty of officers and warrant officers, specialists shipbuilders.

And yet we have kept the best ships, which hitherto inspire reverence "partners" of the Russian Federation in the West and East. By the way, in the 70's and 80's of the amount of naval shipbuilding in the USSR on the order of a superior in France, and our ships were larger and more powerful French counterparts. Remained with the Russian Federation and the frames more persistent sailors and experienced engineers, supervisors and workers, survived the shipyard and engineering offices, training system.

A controversial decision

In the 2000s, there was hope for the revival of the Russian fleet. Although the last reform of the Armed Forces raises many questions in the expert community. So, do not understand the need for the creation of the Military Training and Research Center of the Navy. Such a "monster" is not in any of the maritime powers.

Even more controversy has given rise to a decision about orders helicopter landing in France. Replaced in order to highlight the more moderate means of Russian design bureau, for example, "Nevsky" or "North" to their factories and workers, raise wages shipbuilders and seafarers to do better in the end the conditions of naval service, is meant to invest two billion euros " defense industry "of the Fifth Republic.

Prove the need to purchase amphibious assault ship of the "Mistral" for Russian Navy — task of the Head of Staff of the Navy. Itself to discover this UDC, judging by the current directories and reviews of professionals, not the best in its class or a particularly difficult subject for our shipyards and companies.

At displacement 21,500 tons, feeble defensive armament, the length of 199 meters, it is a good vysokobortnuyu and comparable half-speed (about 18 knots) target (target) for artillery and rockets. As ship management he needs a decent safeguard.

Let's buy it for destroyers and frigates, much less that the Commander of the Navy has said ("Sea Collection», № 4, 2011) plans to acquire a 100-mm French or Italian 127-mm gun mounts. Do we really intend to bury the Russian defense industry, to repeat a sad experience of the royal of, losing three wars of 4 major wars the second half of XIX — early XX century?

Some "experts" have they say that taking arms — it is a Russian tradition beginning with Ivan III. They ought to read or re-read, for example, the works of the Crimean War, during which our sailors were hiding in the ports of helical ships and soldiers fired their rifles bad. Would recommend to also carefully review the research on the First World War, with the memories of its members to provide for themselves, as the birthplace of our standing with his hand outstretched, begging for the Allies not only languishing guns or aircraft (aircraft engines), but even a rifle.

They say that history does not teach anyone, but still it is too late to stop the disastrous foreign orders for the fatherland and to fund its development and production teams. In the history of Peter's better to stay majestically than Nicholas II.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: